AsiaOneNews:

Getting life's priorities right

A PATIENT once told me: "You know what, doctor, when I was told that I have cancer, suddenly all my shares, my properties and my brand-new car have no more meaning."

Yet, the attachment that some Singaporeans have to their cars never fails to amaze me.

When they notice scratches on their vehicles after shooing off a cat resting on them, for example, they would complain to their condominium management or the town council.

These motorists get so angry with the destruction of their "happiness" that they will not rest their case until the cats in the carparks are removed.

In the Housing & Development Board carpark where I park my car, there is a cat which would occasionally rest on car bonnets, including mine.

I have found its paw marks on my windscreen several times, but there are no scratches on my car, just a few small dents that are definitely not caused by a cat.

Whenever I see the cat resting on other cars, I would shoo it off and brush its hair off the vehicles so that the motorists would not complain about the cat's presence.

To me, what is important about a car is that it is functioning well enough to be safe on the road.

So what if it has scratches or dents? Cars are bound to get such marks.

The car does not feel the scratches. Rather, it is our attachment to the car that makes us feel the pain.

The patient who spoke to me became depressed after he was diagnosed with cancer, but his condition improved after he took stock of what was truly important in his life.

When he was near his life's end, I asked him if he was afraid. He said no.

He had done no harm to others, he said, and he remembered the good things that he had done. He also relished the happiness he had brought to others.

He died peacefully.

Dr Tan Chek Wee

Town Councils should accord cat caregivers the same respect as they do other residents

http://www.todayonline.com/articles/261448.asp

In the neighbouring estate — that is under another Town Council :— we started sterilising the cats about two years ago and the Town Council has agreed to let us, the caregivers, look into complaints and not engage pest controllers to round up the cats to be killed at the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority.

Based on our knowledge about “community cats” and from talking to complainants as well as residents who may need to be educated on responsible pet ownership, we can resolve problems without the need to kill. This is important to us as we feel this is what the “heart” is about in a “heartland”.

However, we are disheartened by our recent discovery that a particular Town Council officer instructed the estate cleaning supervisor to direct his workers to trap cats and release them elsewhere. This came to light when a resident found a sterilised cat, bearing a left tipped ear, in a trap. We spoke to several workers, who admitted that they had trapped cats and released them in parks elsewhere.

This perhaps accounted for some of the missing cats over the last few months.

All we ask of the Town Council is to accord us the same respect as every other resident but we find that residents who complain seem to be accorded more rights especially if they complain aggressively.

When the Prime Minister was sworn in, he said that Singaporeans, through hard work and dedication, have built a cohesive and progressive nation that is founded on the principles of meritocracy, social justice and compassion.

We hope this inspiration can be translated in the paradigm shift of Town Councils and others as well. Instead of according due respect to residents such as ourselves, who are in fact following the Government’s repeated appeal for active citizenry, we are instead treated with disdain.

The Electric New Paper :  Educate Cat Owners

9 April 2008    By Dr Tan Chek Wee

On Friday morning as I was walking towards the clinic where I work, I spotted a tiny black kitten,

small enough to sit in the palm of my hand.

It was skinny, hungry and so thirsty that it was lapping up water that flowed out from the washing of

a rubbish chute.  I noticed the kitten's inflamed backside.  It was trusting enough to let me pick it up

so that I could examine its anal region.

To my horror, the anus was almost completely covered with tiny maggots!

The few cats seen regularly in the vicinity of the clinic are all sterilised, as indicated by a small surgical

cut on the tip of the left ear.  This meant the kitten was almost certainly abandoned by an irresponsible

cat owner.

It would have been slowly eaten alive by the maggots, if I had not seen it then.

The kitten was subsequently handed over to a friend, who is taking it to the vet & seeing to its re-homing.

Abandoned cats and kittens often suffer terribly.  I strongly appeal to all cat owners to sterilise their cats.

I suggest that the Town Councils and the Housing Development Board work with organisations such as the

Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals and the Cat Welfare Society to formulate effective grassroots

methods to bring the message of sterilisation to owners of cats.

These methods can include posters, offer of subsidised sterilisation to poor families and organisation of

'cat parties' to inform and educate cat owners.

http://groups.msn.com/SingaporeCats/sporenews.msnw?action=get_message&mview=0&ID_Message=14957

TODAYonline

As number rises to alarming levels, SPCA calls for action

Thursday • February 28, 2008

Leong Wee Keat
weekeat@mediacorp.com.sg

AS THE number of abandoned pedigree dogs shot up alarmingly last year, the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) has urged the authorities to tighten the import, commercial breeding and sale of such dogs.

Three years ago, about one in four lost and unwanted dogs was a purebred. This number rose to "alarming levels" last year, with one in two unwanted dogs a pedigreed. Overall, the SPCA received an average of 250 lost or unwanted dogs each month last year.

The trend shows no signs of abating. Last month, the SPCA received 125 lost and unwanted pedigreed dogs alone. Some reasons cited by owners giving up their canines included leaving the country, moving house, expecting a child and — a frequent excuse — no time to look after it.

In light of this, SPCA has written in to the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) asking for curbs to be placed on the import and commercial breeding or sale of pedigree dogs.

"It's time to take stock of the number being bred, sold and imported annually and to see if there are enough homes for them," SPCA executive officer Deirdre Moss told Today. "There is definitely a surplus (of pedigreed dogs) and too many people buying on the spur of the moment."

Another animal welfare group, Action for Singapore Dogs (ASD), supported SPCA's call. Over the last six months, ASD president Ricky Yeo said the society has seen a 20 to 30 per cent increase in pedigreed strays being picked up.

Even more worryingly, he notes, this trend means that the chances of rescued local mongrels being adopted have also eroded, as pedigreed dogs are seen as being "superior". At ASD, the adoption rate for pedigrees is on the rise, while that for mongrels has been slipping, said Mr Yeo.

An AVA spokesperson said the authority understands SPCA's concerns but reiterated that Singapore operates on "a free market system". He said: "It would not be appropriate to restrict the number and type of dogs imported or bred and sold commercially as long as the pet business is legal and complies with the regulations and applicable conditions."

With the revision of the Animals and Birds (Licensing and Control) Rule last September, the spokesperson said AVA has also introduced several measures — such as compulsory microchipping and introduction of a differential fee for sterilised and unsterilised pet dogs — to discourage abandonment. Tighter controls on breeding dog populations on dog farms were also put in place.

Ms Moss urged would-be owners to think long-term before getting a dog. "Dogs require a lot of attention, socialisation and training," she said. "Your part of the bargain also has to be fulfilled — you have to spend time with them and communicate with them. It is not unlike having a child."

Under the Animals and Birds Act, a person found guilty of abandonment of an animal could be fined up to $10,000 or jailed a year, or both.

Please write to TODAY at news@newstoday.com.sg

with full name, address and contact telephone.

Call for a BAN on import of dogs as well as the breeding of dogs. Many of the dogs come from hell-hole dog breeding mills overseas as well as in Singapore. Just pop by Pasir Ris farmway and look beyond the nice sale front into the back of the breeding farms and see the bad conditions the bitches and studs are in - many have terrible skin conditions.

Is AVA more concern of offending "dog" business people than the welfare of dogs?

There are enough abandoned dogs in shelters to satisfy the need of genuine people who care about dogs. Why is there a need to meet  the need of people who buy dogs like they buy Gucci bags! And discard them like they discard things they lose interest in after a while. These are selfish people who do not deserve the love of a loyal dog! They are the ones who should be abandoned to suffer!

Speak out for these animals because only we have the voices to do that for them!

NEVER BUY PETS!

BOYCOTT SHOPS THAT SELL PETS!

TELL YOUR FRIENDS WHO ARE LOOKING FOR ANIMAL COMPANIONS TO ADOPT FROM SHELTERS!

The Straits Times, 21-01-2008, STForum Online Story

HDB should reconsider replacing ban on cats with ‘motivational’ regulations

I READ with amusement the article in The Sunday Times about ‘Getting to know your neighbours” with a cartoon by Miel showing a smiling lady poking her head from her flat and a cat beside her (The Sunday Times, Jan 13). The problem we face nowadays is really ‘not knowing your neighbours”.

In my neighbourhood, I am fortunate to share a common concern with a few fellow residents on the plight of the community cats.

Cats are pushed to the brink by an increasing human population and decreasing tolerance. They are killed for reasons ranging from noise made during mating, defecation in ‘upstairs” common areas (usually caused by cat owners who let their cats roam out), residents’ phobia of cats, scratches on cars, etc.

Incensed by the ineffective killing of about 13,000 cats every year for more than two decades and at the public expense of more than half a million dollars annually, we decided to get our butts out of our flats and spent many evenings trapping the cats in our neighbourhood and brought them to the vet to be sterilised.

After about three years, we achieved a near 100 per cent sterilised colony of cats. We also work with the town council to help resolve complaints about cats.

Through this community work, we met fellow residents from all walks of life, of all ages and of all races. We also got to meet residents who complained about cats and residents who owned cats but were unaware of responsible pet ownership (that includes sterilisation and keeping them indoors).

We were touched by the fact that almost all the residents who complained about cats did not want killing as a solution. This was often not known to some town council property officers who assumed that engaging pest controllers to remove ‘downstairs” community cats was the solution. This naturally resulted in a recurrence of complaints. By identifying the right cause of the complaints, we could offer a solution that costs only a bottle of vinegar and a packet of camphor balls (to clear the smell of cat poo and to repel the cats).

However, the lack of HDB regulations on responsible cat ownership is a major setback to the success of a managed colony of cats. Irresponsible owners abandon cats and kittens for reasons ranging from moving house, spring cleaning and unwanted litters from unsterilised home cats.

Irresponsible owners let their cats roam freely, resulting in complaints from neighbours. Town Council officers are reluctant to speak to such owners about pet responsibility because they said that ‘HDB does not allow cats”. Referring such recalcitrant cat owners to their HDB colleagues will only result in the abandonment of these cats in the estate instead. This will only transfer the problem to the Town Council which may then blame the expanding population on caregivers like me and my fellow residents.

I appeal to the HDB to urgently reconsider replacing the ban on cats with regulations so that such irresponsible owners will be ‘motivated” by fines to keep their cats indoors and to have them sterilised. This is a win-win situation to residents in general, to caregivers and also to the property officers in the town council.

Tan Chek Wee

http://tippedearclan.wordpress.com/2007/11/02/today-20071102-hdb-pet-rules-letter/

http://www.todayonline.com/articles/219799.asp

Thursday • November 1, 2007

Goh Boon Choo

Like some other countries, Singapore too has its set of pet problems, manifested in our homeless animal population and irresponsible pet ownership.

Government agencies address these problems independently: The Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) regulates pet sales, the Housing and Development Board (HDB) does not permit cats and large-breed dogs to be kept as pets, and pet abandonment is a legislated crime.

HDB residents have the added option of requesting their Town Councils to remove animals for culling by the AVA.

Some 20,000 cats and dogs are put down by the AVA and the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) every year. And the AVA’s annual culling bill averages $500,000.

In spite of these efforts, we still hear of pet-related spats between neighbours and of abandonment issues.

The SPCA receives up to 1,000 animals each month and the homeless animal population stays at around 100,000. This begs the question: Do the current set of policies need a rethink?

Many abandoned pets are not neutered — those which survive become street-smart, ensuring the homeless animal population’s viability despite consistent culling.

While residents can request their Town Councils’ help, culling every animal is not a solution.

Another recourse is to contact the National Environment Agency if the issue is hygiene-related. But the agency can only warn errant pet owners or issue fines.

Is a blanket pet ban the solution? That would be a bad decision because it ignores the fundamentals of pet-animal issues.

The increased abandonment of large dogs as highlighted in the article, “Large dogs: Time for a rethink” (Oct 25), after the AVA tightened licensing rules is a good example. If the problem was simply stricter rules, then it would not just be large dogs being abandoned.

Can this issue be handled better? Possibly.

The key is in acknowledging that people want to keep cats and dogs as pets, regardless of what type of residence they live in.

While some problems cannot be eliminated completely, they can be minimised with a consistent, comprehensive and progressive framework conducive to responsible pet ownership.

Such a framework requires a clear consensus that this is a multi-faceted problem requiring cooperation and coordination among all stakeholders — government agencies, pet sellers, pet owners, animal welfare groups and non-pet owners. Therein lies the crux: The absence of an entity with overarching authority that can facilitate communication at all levels.

For example, while the AVA oversees national rules on pet ownership, the HDB sets its pet laws independently, while Town Councils follow the HDB’s lead. According to animal experts and the AVA, sterilised cats are highly suited for flat-dwelling. Also, temperament and training, rather than size, dictates a dog’s manageability.

Yet, the HDB clings to these very reasons for continuing its ban. And Town Councils do not want cats and dogs outdoors.

Where do such rules leave responsible pet owners, or neighbours of irresponsible ones?

Denying the existence of flat-dwelling pets, and legislating them out of home and hearth aggravate existing problems. All parties should come together and play a part. It is time we rethink our pet policies, starting with the HDB’s rules on pets.

The writer is a reader of Today.

http://www.todayonline.com/articles/214839.asp

This story was printed from TODAYonline

The instinct to care

Thursday • October 4, 2007

Goh Boon Choo

LIKE other countries around the world, animal welfare organisations in Singapore hold events to commemorate World Animal Day today.

The World Animal Day website, www.worldanimalday.org.uk, tells us it is a day which aims to:

• Celebrate animal life in all its forms

• Celebrate humankind's relationship with the animal kingdom

• Acknowledge the diverse roles that animals play in our lives — from being our companions and supporting and helping us, to bringing a sense of wonder into our lives

• Acknowledge and be thankful for the way in which animals enrich our lives.

Do we need a special day to remember the dogs and cats we call our pets, the chickens and cows we eat, the orang utans running out of room in Borneo, or even the polar bears languishing at the melting North Pole?

While some would say yes, there are others who would surely say no. Many people would not have made the deeper connection about relationships between people, animals, the environment and our future. Although there is no lack of information, most people cling to the "out of sight, out of mind" mentality.

No doubt, it is a complex web of connections. But the underpinning principle is simple: Take too much of anything out of a system without allowing it to replenish, and the system will collapse, bringing everything else down with it.

While humankind may have dominion over the Earth — we build civilisations and, in the process, destroy forests and coral reefs — we are not self-sustaining. Wherever we are, we breathe in air that is produced mainly by the tropical rainforests of South America and Indonesia.

It is predicted that there will be no more orang utans to be found in Indonesia's jungles within five to 10 years.

Needless to say, if they go, the rainforests — our oxygen tanks — will not be far behind. The yearly haze that chokes Singapore skies is our reminder that that day is coming.

World Animal Day began in 1931 at a convention of ecologists in Florence as a way of highlighting the plight of endangered species. Even then, the implications of losing animal species were clear. And yet, to date, politics and economics still dictate whether anything is done at all to save a species in peril — often due to human causes.

But before we worry about what happens to animals around the world, compassion must begin at home.

Said Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew at the recent Singapore Maritime Lecture: "I do not see any leaders saying let us eat less, eat more vegetables, eat less meat."

Eating less, and eating less meat, not only translates into a healthier diet, it is kinder to animals and the Earth, and to our fellow men: Resources freed up from feeding farmstock can be diverted to feed the world's 1 billion starving people.

Surely, we must also care about the animals we purport to love. For more than 20 years, 20,000 dogs and cats have been put to death every year. If we sterilise our pets, keep them indoors and do not abandon them, the number of homeless animals wandering our streets — and thus vulnerable to this death sentence — would be that much smaller.

Out of sight should no longer be out of mind. World Animal Day really isn't just about the animals. It is about us, what we do to them and the environment, and what state we leave the system in for our children to inherit.

How will you be celebrating World Animal Day?

This was contributed by a reader.

June 15, 2007

RCs should work with cat caregivers to solve feline problems

THE Cat Welfare Society was disappointed to read about the survey that was conducted in Nee Soon Zone F RC which wanted to remove cats based on the feedback from two residents in the block, ‘Animal carers given short shrift over the cats’ fate by RC’ (Online forum, June 12).

Ms Helga Koh has clearly spoken with a much larger number of residents who did not want the cats removed. That the RC should decide to remove the cats based on a very small return rate on the surveys (three responses in all) is both disappointing and frankly quite surprising.

Either the surveys are not getting to the residents (as seems to have been the case) or the residents do not respond to the survey, thinking it is unimportant and not realising the cats will be removed as a result.

It also seems a waste of resources and time to send out surveys that only three residents responded to. One wonders if the RC also sends out surveys about every other matter in the estate and if there is a more environmentally friendly and perhaps effective way of finding out what residents want.

The Cat Welfare Society hopes that the RC in question will work with caregivers who, as Ms Koh rightly pointed out, are residents themselves and practising cat management in the area.

They are more than happy to work with the RC to help with complaints and to work with fellow residents to make the living environment a better one for all.

Looking into the root cause of the problem is certainly a better solution than removing the cats which will just lead to more unsterilised cats moving in due to what is known as the vacuum effect.

It would be a shame if RCs which are there to foster community relations do the opposite by choosing to listen selectively to some of their residents.

Dawn Kua (Ms)

Director of Operations

Cat Welfare Society

http://www.straitstimes.com/ST%2BForum/Online%2BStory/STIStory_129188.html

Animal carers given short shrift over cats' fate by RC

THE lives of three sterilised cats at Blk 875 Yishun St 81 are to be 'terminated" as a result of a survey conducted by Nee Soon Zone F RC which showed that 'two responders agreed and one responder disagreed to the removal of the cats'.

Madam Wong, a volunteer who lives in this block, did not receive the survey form. Hence, we were understandably upset as we have volunteered our time, effort and money in the neighbourhood's 'Cat Management' programme.

This includes trapping the community cats to be sterilised so that the population remains controlled and eventually reduced with natural attrition, as well as assisting the town council to resolve feedback about cats so that effective solutions are applied. 'Cat Management" helps the town council to conserve public funds by not engaging pest controllers to kill the cats.

Ms Pang, also a caregiver and resident of this RC zone, had sought Mr Goh Han Chuan, the Nee Soon Zone F chairman, for clarification on an earlier survey. However, she was treated with an attitude that was anything but courteous.

A chat with the residents of Blk 875 showed that:

1) The total number of residents spoken to: 36

2) 18 of them claimed not to have received the survey forms

3) 27 residents do not want the cats to be removed and killed

4) Seven are neutral

5) Two wanted the cats killed

Residents who merely file complaints with the RC were given due respect. Surely then, it is not unreasonable for residents such as Ms Pang and I to ask for the same degree of respect.

We appeal to the RC to work with us, not against, because we really have the same goal of reducing the conflicts between humans and cats.

We believe that a humane solution to the problems of living with cats in our midst sends a positive message to our young people whose lives seem to be imbibed with increasing violence and killing.

Singapore prides itself on its multiple achievements. Trap-Neuter-Release-and-Manage is an evidence-based method that will achieve a long-term and effective solution to our problems with cats.

'Cat Management" also provides a platform for residents of different races to work together, providing opportunities for us to know each other better which is a firm foundation of racial harmony.

Helga Koh Nee Gamp (Ms)

http://www.straitstimes.com/ST%2BForum/Online%2BStory/STIStory_128188.html

The Straits Times, Online STForum

June 9, 2007

SPCA applauds animal lovers who care for stray cats

ON BEHALF of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA), we applaud the letter by Mr Tan Chek Wee (May 30), and subsequently the responses by Ms Dawn Kua Su-Wen (June 5) and Mrs Judith Lindley (June 5) following Mr Ho Chi Sam's letter, 'Health and property deserve priority over strays cats' (ST Online Forum, June 2).

The SPCA takes heart to see the kindness of animal lovers who, out of their own pocket, feed and take these stray cats to veterinary clinics for sterilisation.

The society takes in about 500 stray cats every month. Many of these strays appear on the streets because of irresponsible pet owners who abandon them or let them run loose when they are no longer interested in keeping them. Many of these cats were not sterilised before abandonment, so their survival instincts cause them to reproduce prolifically.

Show your support for a more humane solution to the stray animal situation by e-mailing your plea to Mr Mah Bow Tan, Minister for National Development, at mah_bow_tan@mnd.gov.sg.

A scratch on your car may be caused by a fallen branch, an innocent child or even a cat, but it can be polished back to its full glory. However, the culling of innocent animals just because of intolerance and lack of understanding will leave a mark in history for future generations.

With awareness of global warming heightened, everyone is trying to play a role in saving Mother Earth. Singapore is famously known to be 'clean and green' but that colour green surely depicts not just a nation that has many varieties of trees, but more important, that it accepts the presence of other living creatures - birds, lizards, macaques, cats and so on.

If only there were as widespread and deep a sense of urgency to care for our strays.

For information and suggestions on humane stray control, log on to www.spca.org.sg/about_us/opinion.asp#10.

Chong Poh Choo (Miss)

Education Officer

Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

Straits Times May 30: Let's hope town councils do not start a 'holocaust' of cats

Cats blamed for acts not of their doing (ST 5 June 2007)

WE REFER to Mr Ho Chi Sam's letter, 'Health and property deserve priority over stray cats' (ST, June 2).

The Cat Welfare Society is glad that Mr Ho understands the concerns of people who care for animals. We would like to point out, however, that having an effective and humane community (stray) cat policy does not preclude having a safe and clean estate or, indeed, making it a priority.

We agree with Mr Ho that people who litter should be fined for the offence. This is regardless of whether the litter is food for community cats, or much of the other trash we regularly see in housing estates, be it soiled sanitary napkins, discarded cans or leftover packets of food left after human consumption.

Cats that are responsibly fed do not, however, scatter litter and rubbish. Furthermore, once they are sterilised (at the residents' own expense), their cauterwauling, spraying and breeding is reduced. This is key to the programme we have been working to implement island-wide called 'Trap-Neuter-Return-Manage.'

TNRM protects public health and advances the goal of reducing the number of community cats in the environment long-term while still being humane. It is also more cost-effective as sterilisation is a one-time cost, whereas removing and killing the cats is an on-going, continuous process that does not address the problem of cats breeding.

Also, as part of this programme, caregivers who are residents in the same estate, and who also want a clean living environment, help to resolve other residents' complaints.

We must also point out that cats - while they may rest on cars - rarely scratch them and have been blamed in several cases we have dealt with for marks they did not cause.

It is in everyone's best interest to keep the cat population down. However, removing and killing the cats (as has been practised for the last 25 years at a rate of 13,000 cats a year) is clearly not working.

One of the most significant failures of this approach is that it creates a 'vacuum effect' in which cats move in and take over territory and resources that have been left by cats that have been removed and killed. These new unsterilised cats breed and fill in the area to the extent that they can.

We have already killed more than a quarter of a million cats as a nation. How many more will we kill before we realise that the policy is not only ineffective but also a waste of both life and taxpayers' money?

Dawn Kua Su-Wen (Ms)

Director of Operations

Cat Welfare Society

Straits Times May 30:

I FAIL to understand why town councils are so 'spooked' by cats that they are bent on getting rid of all of them with the recent adoption of 'Zero Strays' policy, based on their perception that 'most' residents do not like cats.

Notwithstanding the killing of 13,000 cats a year for more than 20 years, costing taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars, many residents have volunteered themselves in 'cat management' which includes trapping and sterilising stray cats and identifying them with a surgical cut at the tip of the left ear and assisting town councils to investigate complaints about cats with resulting effective and cost-free solutions.

The impression at the grassroots level is that most residents are against killing cats and when informed there is a humane method of controlling the cat population, that is, trap-neuter-release-and-manage (TnRM), they have given the 'thumbs up'.

Volunteer-caregivers like me, who spend much time, effort and money in TnRM, also wish for a day when there are zero cats on the streets with every cat in the safe refuge of homes.

To achieve that, we hope for the HBD to lift the ban on keeping cats, AVA to put a ban on import and sale of pets and the legislation of a law mandating the sterilisation of all pets, including home cats.

Meanwhile, we hope to be assured that the town council's 'zero strays' policy is tied up with cat management and that there will not be a holocaust of cats.

A few months ago, one of my 'senior citizen' patients came to see me looking very distraught.

He wasn't physically ill but he was devastated when he heard that a black-and-white tipped ear community cat that often sought out his company as he sat in the void deck was abused and killed.

Then a few weeks later, he came to see me again, this time bearing a big grin. He said 'his' cat was back. Someone has brought the cat to the vet for treatment. It has recovered from its injury and released back into the community.

If the town councils accede to request 'zero strays', I shudder to think what our 'urban jungle' will be like when residents request 'zero birds', 'zero trees', 'zero bicycles', et cetera. When does the town council deem such requests unreasonable?

American radio legend Paul Harvey said: 'Ever occur to you why some of us can be this much concerned with animals suffering? Because government is not. Why not? Animals don't vote.’

Is it true?

Dr Tan Chek Wee

Letter by George Jacobs published in todays Sunday Times.

Below is the original version - not all of which was published

The Straits Times Online STForum 

April 7, 2007

Town councils, please educate irresponsible pet owners

OUT of concern over the constant killing of cats by the town council in response to complaints, a few residents including me, decided to volunteer in 'cat management' to cover about 20 blocks of HDB flats in my estate. 'Cat management' includes sterilising community cats and helping the town council investigate and resolve complaints about cats.

After four years that include many hours waiting for elusive cats to walk into cat traps on loan from the Cat Welfare Society, we are happy that almost all the cats in our part of the estate now sport a left tipped ear, a sign that it is sterilised, will not emit a caterwauling noise and will not produce litter after litter of unwanted kittens. Noise from male cats fighting to dominate female cats is now limited to the occasional fight over territory.

Our concern now is the lack of regulations on pet ownership. During the four-year period of 'cat management', we identified two families with unsterilised cats that were allowed to roam freely. We spoke to these families and persuaded them to let us send their cats to the vet for sterilisation. Recently, there was a family with five cats but they allowed us to send only four for sterilisation. As this family admitted they leave their cats 'downstairs', we now worry this one unsterilised female cat may be allowed to breed and the kittens will be abandoned. This will be a setback in the control of the cat population in the estate.

We appeal to the town council and perhaps the residential committees to help educate these irresponsible pet owners.

However, if the HDB will replace its ban on cats with regulations to impose a fine on owners who refuse to sterilise their cats and allow them to roam freely in the common corridors, this will speed up the success of the Trap-Neuter-Release-Manage (TnRM) programme to reduce the population of community cats humanely and cost-effectively. We too want a decrease in the cat population but we believe this can be done without the need to kill them by applying evidence-based TnRM.

Carol Sim Swee Chin (Ms)

A great letter by Dr Tan in today's papers!

THE STRAITS TIMES INTERACTIVE

http://www.todayonline.com/articles/167649.asp

TODAY

Forced to put on the coat of Dr Death

As sole welfare body, rigid Government policies give SPCA no choice but to euthanase strays

Wednesday • January 24, 2007

Letter from Deirdre Moss
Executive Officer
Society for the Prevention of to Animals (SPCA)

I REFER to the letter "Killing strays is not an act of kindness (Jan 19)" by Fiona Yuen. Reference was made to how the SPCA should learn from Albuquerque's Mayor Martin Chavez and the Canadian authorities, who are working towards ending euthanasia.

The SPCA wholeheartedly supports the idea of not having to euthanase stray animals or abandoned pets. No one would wish that more than our society, which has the dreaded task of dealing with half of Singapore's annual unwanted animal population, of which more than 50 per cent are strays.

Being the only animal welfare organisation that has a shelter taking in 900 animals monthly — Singapore, unlike countries such as Canada, has no alternative shelters or private organisations taking in masses of strays or unwanted pets — euthanasia has become a necessity.

As long as there are strays proliferating on the streets without a mass sterilisation programme, and as long as there is no restriction on the commercial breeding and sale of pets (SPCA animals are having to compete for homes with the masses of pets on sale), the problem of having to put down surplus animals is going to be with us.

Restrictions on the keeping of cats and medium-sized dogs in Housing and Development Board (HDB) flats is another obstacle to our goal of euthanasing fewer animals. For years, the SPCA has been lobbying the authorities to change the HDB's policies to accommodate more pets, so that the surplus population of strays can be reduced.

Since 1991, the SPCA has had a voucher programme for the sterilisation of stray cats at participating veterinary practices, which enables stray caretakers to sterilise a stray and put it back at its original location, with SPCA footing the bill; $4,800 is channelled to this project monthly, translating to 140 free vouchers each month.

Without the Government's cooperation, animal welfare organisations cannot hope to make a reasonable dent in the stray population because sterilisation on a large scale must be carried out across the island.

The SPCA has been writing to the authorities and asking members and friends to request that the Stray Cat Rehabilitation Programme — halted during the Sars outbreak — be reinstated.

The SPCA agrees that euthanasia does not get to the root cause of the problem, which is that too many animals are being born or imported. Our website, www.spca.org.sg, and our staff also inform those considering bringing a stray or unwanted pet to our premises to please exhaust all other possibilities first.

If owners shoulder the responsibility of finding a home for their unwanted pets, and if those who find stray animals do the same, the SPCA statistics of putting down animals would drop dramatically from its present rate of 82 per cent.

For now, the SPCA must continue to shoulder the burden of putting excess animals to sleep — the alternative being to turn people with unwanted animals away.

This notion has been deliberated on over the years, but most of our members baulk at turning animals away, as this would result in many being dumped back on the street where they may suffer a fate worse than death.

The SPCA sincerely hopes the Government is listening to all pleas to institute a mass programme for the sterilisation of strays, in addition to being more flexible in its HDB policies on pets, so culling and euthanasing can become a thing of the past.

Only with proactive and more humane approaches plus organisations and individuals working together, can we hope to become a truly compassionate society.

Cat strangled with nylon string:  http://groups.msn.com/SingaporeCats/sporenews.msnw?action=get_message&mview=0&ID_Message=12370

One of the letters to the Straits Times regarding the latest incident of cat abuse:

Jan 13, 2007
Link between AVA pest controllers and cat stranglers

In Singapore, when crows are seen feeding from hawker centre tables, the next thing you see is shooters from the Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) with shot guns shooting crows from the sky.

In Singapore, when flocks of pigeons are seen congregating, the next thing you see is flocks of dead pigeons poisoned by the AVA in the name of pest control.

In Singapore, when cats are seen sleeping on car bonnets or wandering in the neighbourhood, the next thing you see is a pest control vehicle rumbling off to the AVA with cages of ‘pests’ to be put to sleep.

Hence, it is no surprise to see the occasional cat beaten, or in the latest incident strangled. After all, if the answer to every ‘pest’ is summary execution, the perpetrator of the latest spate of cat abuse is merely repeating what the authorities are doing - taking matters into his own hands and engaging in ‘pest control’.

Perhaps it is time for the authorities to rethink their methods to prevent more copycat actions by members of the public.

Adriane Lee Swee Mun